Su May Liew

Text messaging reminders to reduce non-attendance in chronic disease follow-up: a clinical trial

BACKGROUND Non-attendance results in administrative problems and disruption in patient care. Several interventions have been used to reduce non-attendance, with varying degree of success. A relatively new intervention, text messaging, has been shown to be as effective as telephone reminders in reducing non-attendance. However, no study has looked specifically at using text messaging reminders to reduce non-attendance in chronic disease care. AIM To determine if text messaging would be effective in reducing non-attendance in patients on long-term followup, compared with telephone reminders and no reminder. DESIGN OF STUDY A randomised controlled trial with three arms: text messaging reminder, telephone reminder, and control. SETTING Two primary care clinics in Malaysia. METHOD A total of 931 subjects who had been on at least 6 months of follow-up were randomised into the three groups. Demographic variables were recorded at the first visit. In the intervention arms, a reminder was sent 24–48 hours prior to the appointment. Non-attendance rate was documented at the second visit. Non-attenders were defined as those who did not attend, attended early, or attended late without rescheduling their appointment. Attenders were defined as participants who had turned up for their scheduled appointment and those who had changed or cancelled their appointment with notification. RESULTS The non-attendance rates in the text messaging group (odds ratio [OR] = 0.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.41 to 0.93, P = 0.020) and the telephone reminder group (OR = 0.53, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.81), P = 0.003) were significantly lower than the control group. The absolute non-attendance rate for telephone reminders was lower by 2% compared to the text messaging group. This difference was not found to be statistically significant (P = 0.505). CONCLUSION Text messaging was found to be as effective as telephone reminder in reducing non-attendance in patients who required long-term follow-up for their chronic illnesses in this study. It could be used as an alternative to conventional reminder systems.

Cardiovascular risk scores do not account for the effect of treatment: A review

Objective To compare the strengths and limitations of cardiovascular risk scores available for clinicians in assessing the global (absolute) risk of cardiovascular disease. Design Review of cardiovascular risk scores. Data sources Medline (1966 to May 2009) using a mixture of MeSH terms and free text for the keywords ‘cardiovascular’, ‘risk prediction’ and ‘cohort studies’. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies A study was eligible if it fulfilled the following criteria: (1) it was a cohort study of adults in the general population with no prior history of cardiovascular disease and not restricted by a disease condition; (2) the primary objective was the development of a cardiovascular risk score/equation that predicted an individuals absolute cardiovascular risk in 5–10 years; (3) the score could be used by a clinician to calculate the risk for an individual patient. Results 21 risk scores from 18 papers were identified from 3536 papers. Cohort size ranged from 4372 participants (SHS) to 1591209 records (QRISK2). More than half of the cardiovascular risk scores (11) were from studies with recruitment starting after 1980. Definitions and methods for measuring risk predictors and outcomes varied widely between scores. Fourteen cardiovascular risk scores reported data on prior treatment, but this was mainly limited to antihypertensive treatment. Only two studies reported prior use of lipid-lowering agents. None reported on prior use of platelet inhibitors or data on treatment drop-ins. Conclusions The use of risk-factor-modifying drugs—for example, statins—and disease-modifying medication—for example, platelet inhibitors—was not accounted for. In addition, none of the risk scores addressed the effect of treatment drop-ins—that is, treatment started during the study period. Ideally, a risk score should be derived from a population free from treatment. The lack of accounting for treatment effect and the wide variation in study characteristics, predictors and outcomes causes difficulties in the use of cardiovascular risk scores for clinical treatment decision.

Unmet needs of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD): a qualitative study on patients and doctors

BackgroundChronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a chronic disease with repeated exacerbations resulting in gradual debilitation. The quality of life has been shown to be poor in patients with COPD despite efforts to improve self-management. However, the evidence on the benefit of self-management in COPD is conflicting. Whether this could be due to other unmet needs of patients have not been investigated. Therefore, we aimed to explore unmet needs of patients from both patients and doctors managing COPD.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study with doctors and patients in Malaysia. We used convenience sampling to recruit patients until data saturation. Eighteen patients and eighteen doctors consented and were interviewed using a semi-structured interview guide. The interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and checked by the interviewers. Data were analysed using a thematic approach.ResultsThe themes were similar for both the patients and doctors. Three main themes emerged: knowledge and awareness of COPD, psychosocial and physical impact of COPD and the utility of self-management. Knowledge about COPD was generally poor. Patients were not familiar with the term chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or COPD. The word ‘asthma’ was used synonymously with COPD by both patients and doctors. Most patients experienced difficulties in their psychosocial and physical functions such as breathlessness, fear and helplessness. Most patients were not confident in self-managing their illness and prefer a more passive role with doctors directing their care.ConclusionsIn conclusion, our study showed that knowledge of COPD is generally poor. There was mislabelling of COPD as asthma by both patients and physicians. This could have resulted in the lack of understanding of treatment options, outcomes, and prognosis of COPD. The misconception that cough due to COPD was contagious, and breathlessness that resulted from COPD, had important physical and psychosocial impact, and could lead to social isolation. Most patients and physicians did not favour self-management approaches, suggesting innovations based on self-management may be of limited benefit.

Medical errors in primary care clinics – a cross sectional study

BackgroundPatient safety is vital in patient care. There is a lack of studies on medical errors in primary care settings. The aim of the study is to determine the extent of diagnostic inaccuracies and management errors in public funded primary care clinics.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study conducted in twelve public funded primary care clinics in Malaysia. A total of 1753 medical records were randomly selected in 12 primary care clinics in 2007 and were reviewed by trained family physicians for diagnostic, management and documentation errors, potential errors causing serious harm and likelihood of preventability of such errors.ResultsThe majority of patient encounters (81%) were with medical assistants. Diagnostic errors were present in 3.6% (95% CI: 2.2, 5.0) of medical records and management errors in 53.2% (95% CI: 46.3, 60.2). For management errors, medication errors were present in 41.1% (95% CI: 35.8, 46.4) of records, investigation errors in 21.7% (95% CI: 16.5, 26.8) and decision making errors in 14.5% (95% CI: 10.8, 18.2). A total of 39.9% (95% CI: 33.1, 46.7) of these errors had the potential to cause serious harm. Problems of documentation including illegible handwriting were found in 98.0% (95% CI: 97.0, 99.1) of records. Nearly all errors (93.5%) detected were considered preventable.ConclusionsThe occurrence of medical errors was high in primary care clinics particularly with documentation and medication errors. Nearly all were preventable. Remedial intervention addressing completeness of documentation and prescriptions are likely to yield reduction of errors.

Evidence for non-communicable diseases: analysis of Cochrane reviews and randomised trials by World Bank classification

Introduction Prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) is increasing globally, with the greatest projected increases in low-income and middle-income countries. We sought to quantify the proportion of Cochrane evidence relating to NCDs derived from such countries. Methods We searched the Cochrane database of systematic reviews for reviews relating to NCDs highlighted in the WHO NCD action plan (cardiovascular, cancers, diabetes and chronic respiratory diseases). We excluded reviews at the protocol stage and those that were repeated or had been withdrawn. For each review, two independent researchers extracted data relating to the country of the corresponding author and the number of trials and participants from countries, using the World Bank classification of gross national income per capita. Results 797 reviews were analysed, with a reported total number of 12 340 trials and 10 937 306 participants. Of the corresponding authors 90% were from high-income countries (41% from the UK). Of the 746 reviews in which at least one trial had met the inclusion criteria, only 55% provided a summary of the country of included trials. Analysis of the 633 reviews in which country of trials could be established revealed that almost 90% of trials and over 80% of participants were from high-income countries. 438 (5%) trials including 1 145 013 (11.7%) participants were undertaken in low-middle income countries. We found that only 13 (0.15%) trials with 982 (0.01%) participants were undertaken in low-income countries. Other than the five Cochrane NCD corresponding authors from South Africa, only one other corresponding author was from Africa (Gambia). Discussion The overwhelming body of evidence for NCDs pertains to high-income countries, with only a small number of review authors based in low-income settings. As a consequence, there is an urgent need for research infrastructure and funding for the undertaking of high-quality trials in this area.

Healthcare Professionals’ and Policy Makers’ Views on Implementing a Clinical Practice Guideline of Hypertension Management: A Qualitative Study

Introduction Most studies have reported barriers to guideline usage mainly from doctors’ perspective; few have reported the perspective of other stakeholders. This study aimed to determine the views and barriers to adherence of a national clinical practice guideline (CPG) on management of hypertension from the perspectives of policymakers, doctors and allied healthcare professionals. Methods This study used a qualitative approach with purposive sampling. Seven in depth interviews and six focus group discussions were conducted with 35 healthcare professionals (policy makers, doctors, pharmacists and nurses) at a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, between February and June 2013. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and checked. Thematic approach was used to analyse the data. Results Two main themes and three sub-themes emerged from this study. The main themes were (1) variation in the use of CPG and (2) barriers to adherence to CPG. The three sub-themes for barriers were issues inherent to the CPG, systems and policy that is not supportive of CPG use, and attitudes and behaviour of stakeholders. The main users of the CPG were the primary care doctors. Pharmacists only partially use the guidelines, while nurses and policy makers were not using the CPG at all. Participants had suggested few strategies to improve usage and adherence to CPG. First, update the CPG regularly and keep its content simple with specific sections for allied health workers. Second, use technology to facilitate CPG accessibility and provide protected time for implementation of CPG recommendations. Third, incorporate local CPG in professional training, link CPG adherence to key performance indicators and provide incentives for its use. Conclusions Barriers to the use of CPG hypertension management span across all stakeholders. The development and implementation of CPG focused mainly on doctors with lack of involvement of other healthcare stakeholders. Guidelines should be made simple, current, reliable, accessible, inclusive of all stakeholders and with good policy support.

Why is there variation in the practice of evidence-based medicine in primary care? A qualitative study

Objective To explore the factors, including barriers and facilitators, influencing the practice of evidence-based medicine (EBM) across various primary care settings in Malaysia based on the doctors’ views and experiences. Research design The qualitative study was used to answer the research question. 37 primary care physicians participated in six focus group discussions and six individual in-depth interviews. A semistructured topic guide was used to facilitate both the interviews and focus groups, which were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, checked and analysed using a thematic approach. Participants 37 primary care doctors including medical officers, family medicine specialists, primary care lecturers and general practitioners with different working experiences and in different settings. Setting The study was conducted across three primary care settings—an academic primary care practice, private and public health clinics in Klang Valley, Malaysia. Results The doctors in this study were aware of the importance of EBM but seldom practised it. Three main factors influenced the implementation of EBM in the doctors’ daily practice. First, there was a lack of knowledge and skills in searching for and applying evidence. Second, workplace culture influenced doctors’ practice of EBM. Third, some doctors considered EBM as a threat to good clinical practice. They were concerned that rigid application of evidence compromised personalised patient care and felt that EBM did not consider the importance of clinical experience. Conclusions Despite being aware of and having a positive attitude towards EBM, doctors in this study seldom practised EBM in their routine clinical practice. Besides commonly cited barriers such as having a heavy workload and lack of training, workplace ‘EBM culture’ had an important influence on the doctors’ behaviour. Strategies targeting barriers at the practice level should be considered when implementing EBM in primary care.

Tuberculosis in Malaysia: predictors of treatment outcomes in a national registry

OBJECTIVES To determine treatment outcomes and associated predictors of all patients registered in 2012 with the Malaysian National Tuberculosis (TB) Surveillance Registry. METHODS Sociodemographic and clinical data were analysed. Unfavourable outcomes included treatment failure, transferred out and lost to follow-up, treatment defaulters, those not evaluated and all-cause mortality. RESULTS In total, 21 582 patients were registered. The mean age was 42.36 ± 17.77 years, and 14.2% were non-Malaysians. The majority were new cases (93.6%). One fifth (21.5%) had unfavourable outcomes; of these, 46% died, 49% transferred out or defaulted and 1% failed treatment. Predictors of unfavourable outcomes were older age, male sex, foreign citizenship, lower education, no bacille Calmette-Guérin (BCG) vaccination scar, treatment in tertiary settings, smoking, previous anti-tuberculosis treatment, human immunodeficiency virus infection, not receiving directly observed treatment, advanced chest radiography findings, multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) and extra-pulmonary TB. For all-cause mortality, predictors were similar except for rural dwelling and nationality (higher mortality among locals). Absence of BCG scar, previous treatment for TB and MDR-TB were not found to be predictors of all-cause mortality. Indigenous populations in East Malaysia had lower rates of unfavourable treatment outcomes. CONCLUSIONS One fifth of TB patients had unfavourable outcomes. Intervention strategies should target those at increased risk of unfavourable outcomes and all-cause mortality.

Cardiovascular risk scores: qualitative study of how primary care practitioners understand and use them

BACKGROUND The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines and the Quality Outcomes Framework require practitioners to use cardiovascular risk scores in assessments for the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. AIM To explore GPs understanding and use of cardiovascular risk scores. DESIGN AND SETTING Qualitative study with purposive maximum variation sampling of 20 GPs working in Oxfordshire, UK. Method Thematic analysis of transcriptions of face-to-face interviews with participants undertaken by two individuals (one clinical, one non-clinical). RESULTS GPs use cardiovascular risk scores primarily to guide treatment decisions by estimating the risk of a vascular event if the patient remains untreated. They expressed considerable uncertainty about how and whether to take account of existing drug treatment or other types of prior risk modification. They were also unclear about the choice between the older scores, based on the Framingham study, and newer scores, such as QRISK. There was substantial variation in opinion about whether scores could legitimately be used to illustrate to patients the change in risk as a result of treatment. The overall impression was of considerable confusion. CONCLUSION The drive to estimate risk more precisely by qualifying guidance and promoting new scores based on partially-treated populations appears to have created unnecessary confusion for little obvious benefit. National guidance needs to be simplified, and, to be fit for purpose, better reflect the ways in which cardiovascular risk scores are currently used in general practice. Patients may be better served by simple advice to use a Framingham score and exercise more clinical judgement, explaining to patients the necessary imprecision of any individual estimate of risk.

What influences patients’ acceptance of a blood pressure telemonitoring service in primary care? A qualitative study

Background Telemonitoring of home blood pressure (BP) is found to have a positive effect on BP control. Delivering a BP telemonitoring service in primary care offers primary care physicians an innovative approach toward management of their patients with hypertension. However, little is known about patients’ acceptance of such service in routine clinical care. Objective This study aimed to explore patients’ acceptance of a BP telemonitoring service delivered in primary care based on the technology acceptance model (TAM). Methods A qualitative study design was used. Primary care patients with uncontrolled office BP who fulfilled the inclusion criteria were enrolled into a BP telemonitoring service offered between the period August 2012 and September 2012. This service was delivered at an urban primary care clinic in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Twenty patients used the BP telemonitoring service. Of these, 17 patients consented to share their views and experiences through five in-depth interviews and two focus group discussions. An interview guide was developed based on the TAM. The interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was used for analysis. Results Patients found the BP telemonitoring service easy to use but struggled with the perceived usefulness of doing so. They expressed confusion in making sense of the monitored home BP readings. They often thought about the implications of these readings to their hypertension management and overall health. Patients wanted more feedback from their doctors and suggested improvement to the BP telemonitoring functionalities to improve interactions. Patients cited being involved in research as the main reason for their intention to use the service. They felt that patients with limited experience with the internet and information technology, who worked out of town, or who had an outdoor hobby would not be able to benefit from such a service. Conclusion Patients found BP telemonitoring service in primary care easy to use but needed help to interpret the meanings of monitored BP readings. Implementations of BP telemonitoring service must tackle these issues to maximize the patients’ acceptance of a BP telemonitoring service.